Trio Vol. 4 no. 2 (2015)

TRIO vol. 4 no. 2

™

™

™

™

™

™

Flûte traversière / Flûte d'amour

Double

Basse

6 6

™

™

™

™

™

™

1. 2.

4

6 4 e 6

C C C

&bbb& # U d

&bbb& # d

?bbb

&bbbU d U d

&bbb d d U

?bbb n

Œ œ œ œ œ™ œJ œ™ œJ ˙™ œ

Œ ≈œ œn œnœœœ œJ œœœœœœœ œ™ œJ ˙™

œ

œœ œ œ œ œ ˙ œ œn œn œ

œ™ œJ œ ^œœn œ™ œJ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ‰ œJ œ œ

œ™œœ œœœ œœ œn œ™

œœ œœœ œ œ ≈œ œn œnœœœ œJ œ ‰ œJ œ œœ™

˙ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œœ œ œ œ™ œJ œ œ

Joulukuu 2015

Vol. 4 no. 2

™

™

™

™

™

™

Flûte traversière / Flûte d'amour

Double

Basse

6 6

™

™

™

™

™

™

1. 2.

4

6 4 e

C C C

&

&

&

&

&

&bbbbbbbbbb&&&&&& #### U d

&

&

&

&

&

&bbbbbbbbbb&&&&&& #### d

?

?

?

??bbbbbbbbbbb

&

&

&

&

&

&bbbbbbbbbbU d U d

&

&

&

&

&

&bbbbbbbbbb d d

?

?

?

??bbbbbbbbbbb n

ŒŒŒŒ œœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœœ™ œœœJJJJJ œœœ™ œœœJJJJJ ŒŒŒŒ ≈≈≈œœœ œœœœnnn œœœnnnnœœœœœœœœœœœ œœœJJJJJ œœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœ œœœ™ œœœJJJJJ

œœœœœœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ ˙˙˙

œœœœ™ œœœJJJJJ œœœ ^œœœœœnnnn œœœœ™ œœœJJJJJ œœœœ œœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœœ ‰‰‰

œœœœ™œœœœœœ œœœœœœœœœœ œœœœœœœœ œœœnnnn œœœ™

œœœœœœœ œœœœœœœœœœœœ œœœ œœœœ ≈≈≈œœœ œœœœnnn œœœnnnnœœœœœœœœœœœ œœœJJJJJ œœœœ ‰‰‰

˙˙˙ œœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœ œœœœ

œœœ œœœœœœœ œœœ œœœ œœœœ™

Toimituskunta: professori Veijo Murtomäki, päätoimittaja (SibA/Säte),

MuT Ulla Pohjannoro, toimitussihteeri (SibA/DocMus), MuT Markus Kuikka (DocMus), MuT Laura Wahlfors Toimitusneuvosto: professori Erkki Huovinen (JYU), dosentti Timo Kaitaro (HY),

professori Anne Kauppala (SibA/DocMus), FT Inkeri Ruokonen (HY), professori Hannu Salmi (TY), professori Lauri Suurpää (SibA/Säte), dosentti Timo Virtanen (KK/JSW), MuT Olli Väisälä (SibA/Säte), dosentti Susanna Välimäki (TY)

Taitto: Tiina Laino

Painopaikka: Unigrafia Oy, Helsinki 2015 Toimituksen osoite:

Taideyliopiston Sibelius-Akatemia DocMus-tohtorikoulu

PL 30, 00097 Taideyliopisto

http://www5.siba.fi/art-and-research/research/research-publications ISBN 978-952-329-006-8

ISSN-L 2242-6418 ISSN 2242-6418 (painettu) ISSN 2242-6426 (verkkojulkaisu)

MuT Ulla Pohjannoro, toimitussihteeri (SibA/DocMus), MuT Markus Kuikka (DocMus), MuT Laura Wahlfors Toimitusneuvosto: professori Erkki Huovinen (JYU), dosentti Timo Kaitaro (HY),

professori Anne Kauppala (SibA/DocMus), FT Inkeri Ruokonen (HY), professori Hannu Salmi (TY), professori Lauri Suurpää (SibA/Säte), dosentti Timo Virtanen (KK/JSW), MuT Olli Väisälä (SibA/Säte), dosentti Susanna Välimäki (TY)

Taitto: Tiina Laino

Painopaikka: Unigrafia Oy, Helsinki 2015 Toimituksen osoite:

Taideyliopiston Sibelius-Akatemia DocMus-tohtorikoulu

PL 30, 00097 Taideyliopisto

http://www5.siba.fi/art-and-research/research/research-publications ISBN 978-952-329-006-8

ISSN-L 2242-6418 ISSN 2242-6418 (painettu) ISSN 2242-6426 (verkkojulkaisu)

SiSällyS

lukijalle ... 5

Artikkeli

Patrick Furu, Marta Medico Piqué & Jörg reckhenrich Simon rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic:

Co-creating leadership and organizational culture ... 7

rAPortti

anu VehViläinen, Sanna VehViläinen, katarina nuMMi-kuiSMa, SePPo kiManen Mestari & kisälli.

luentosarja valotti taidemusiikin koulutuksen keskeistä kontekstia ... 29

lektiot Juhani aleSaro

The apparition from the forest.

A treatise on Satz in the music of Jean Sibelius ... 55 Peter ettruP larSen

Communicational Aspects of the Symphonic Music of Carl Nielsen

– How does a contemporary audience respond to Carl Nielsen’s Symphony No. 2 after receiving “an elementary introduction?” ... 60 Petri lehto

Bassic Instinct. Five acoustic aspects to the instrumental nature

of the double bass in chamber ensembles ...72 Jari S. Puhakka

Flûte d’amour. Musiikki ja soittimet ...78

kirJA-Arvio MarkuS Mantere

tervetullut käännös klassikosta

eduard Hanslick: Musiikille ominaisesta kauneudesta ...84 ABStrACtS iN eNgliSH ... 87

Lukijalle

Taideyliopiston Sibelius-Akatemian DocMus-tohtorikoulun Trio-julkaisu on nel- jän vuoden työn tuloksena vakiinnuttanut asemansa Suomen Musiikkitieteellisen Seuran Musiikki-lehden rinnalla klassisen musiikin tutkimukseen laajasti keskitty- vänä julkaisuna. Tilaus on suuri, sillä musiikkitieteen painotukset ovat muuttuneet ja tutkimusalueet ovat laajentuneet siinä määrin, että on tarve pitää yllä musiikkitie- teen perinteisiä vahvuusalueita – unohtamatta uudempia avauksia, kuten esittävän taiteen tutkimusta ja usein ongelmaiseksi koettua taiteellista tutkimusta sekä mu- siikkielämän managerointiin liittyvää tutkimusta.

Esittävän taiteen tutkimus voi keskittyä mihin tahansa kommunikaatioketjun osatekijään: voidaan ottaa esimerkiksi positio, josta käsin pyritään ymmärtämään säveltäjän työtä yhteydessä teokseen ja sen välittämiseen; voidaan tutkia soivuutta ja sen suhdetta soittimeen tai esitystilaan sekä erilaisten tulkintojen/soivien tulos- ten vaikutuksia kuulijaan. Aihepiiri on lähes rajaton. Taiteellisessa tutkimuksessa nähdäkseni keskiössä on taiteilija-esittäjän kokemustieto, jossa oman syventymisen ja reflektion kautta löydetään merkityksellisiksi havaittuja kvaliteetteja musiikista tai esittämisestä. Tässä taideteoksen ja muusikko-kokijan suhde ja ennen kaikkea sen tuottaman kokemustiedon suhde ja tulokset voivat olla moninaisia. Olennaista tutkimus- tai tieteellisen tiedon pätevyyden kannalta on kirjallisen esittämisen moo- di. Introspektio on taiteilijan vahvuusaluetta, johon toivottavasti yhdistyy argumen- tointi, jossa oman intuition ja kokemuksen anti nousee myös teoreettisesti pitävistä huomioista. Ratkaisevaa taiteellisen tutkimuksen kannalta onkin käydä keskustelua, jossa tälle tutkimusotteelle ominaiset ja kehiteltävät kielelliset diskurssit saavat laa- jemman tutkimusyhteisön hyväksynnän ja arvostuksen – sillä taiteellinen tutkimus on tullut jäädäkseen.

Käsillä olevan Trion numeron eri kirjoitustyypeissä esittävän taiteen ja musii- killisen kommunikaation kysymykset ovat vahvasti keskiössä. Patrick Furun, Mar- ta Medico Piquén ja Jörg Reckhenrichin vertaisarvioidussa artikkelissa pohditaan esimerkkitapauksena Berliinin filharmonikkojen muusikoiden ja sen johtajan, Sir Simon Rattlen, toimintaa ja organisaatiokulttuuria. Anu Vehviläinen, Sanna Veh- viläinen, Katarina Nummi-Kuisma ja Seppo Kimanen käsittelevät yhteisessä kat- sauksessaan aina ajankohtaista aihetta: opettajan ja opiskelijan suhdetta länsimaisen taidemusiikin pedagogiikassa, mihin liittyy myös muusikon ja yleisön olennainen,

dollisia. Peter Ettrup Larsenin taiteellisen tohtoritutkinnon kirjallisen työn aiheena oli Carl Nielsenin toisen sinfonian yleisövastaanotto yhdistettynä yleisön tiedolli- seen valistamiseen. Petri Lehto tutki tohtorikonserteissaan kontrabasson luonnetta ja toimintaa erilaisissa akustisissa ympäristöissä. Jari S. Puhakka esittelee ainakin suomalaiselle musiikkiyhteisölle aiemmin lähes tuntemattoman huiluperheen soit- timen, flûte d’amourin, sekä sen ohjelmiston. Juhani Alesaron tieteellisen väitöskirjan aiheena on yllättävän harvoin systemaattisesti analysoitu kohde Jean Sibeliuksen musiikissa: moodit ja niiden kansanmusiikillisesta vaikutuksesta kummunnut uus- modaalisuus sekä polymodaalisuus. Sibeliuksen Satzin eli musiikin kudoksen ku- vaamiseksi on otettu käyttöön uutta terminologiaa, tärkeimpänä käsite ”three-voice framework”. Sillä luonnehditaan kenraalibasson aikana muodostuneen, kaksiäänisen diskantti–basso-raamin ohelle tullutta Sibeliuksen musiikin kolmiäänistä peruske- hystä. Mukana on vielä Markus Mantereen kirja-arvio, jossa esitellään ilmestymises- tään (1854) yli puolentoista vuosisadan jälkeen suomeksi saatu Eduard Hanslickin käänteentekevä teos Musiikille ominaisesta kauneudesta kääntäjänään Ilkka Oramo.

Jätän tämän numeron myötä Trion päätoimittajuuden. Vaikka keskustelua leh- den linjasta ja sisällöstä sekä sen asemasta musiikintutkimuksen ja musiikintutki- joiden muodostamassa kokonaisuudessa on aina syytä käydä, lehti on osoittanut tarpeellisuutensa ja sen tulevaisuus näyttää sangen valoisalta. Kiitän kaikkia lehden kanssatekijöitä ja kirjoittajia sekä lukijoita antoisista vuosista.

Espoossa, tammikuulla 2016 Veijo Murtomäki

Patrick Furu, Marta Medico Piqué & Jörg reckhenrich¹

Simon rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic:

Co-creating leadership and organizational culture

introduction

The Berlin Philharmonic has been described as “one of the world’s most democratic musical ventures” (Gapper, 2015). The particular characteristic of the orchestra is that the key decision maker is in fact the whole orchestra. In other words, every important decision, such as hiring the chief conductor or new musicians, is made not by a professional management, but rather the musicians themselves. In organization and leadership studies, this type of democratic form of organizing has been seen as a defining aspect of the organization’s leadership and culture (Yukl, 2013).

In terms of musicality, the distinctive characteristic of the Berlin Philharmonic is its hallmark sound that has been called “sheer grandeur”, or “extraordinary rich sound” by the chief conductor Sir Simon Rattle. The sound is based on the orchestra’s tradition and it has been shaped and refined by the orchestra’s strong artistic directors.

While preserving the orchestra’s unique sound (e.g., Hewett, 2012; White, 2015) and maintaining its self-governing structure has been at the core of its identity and culture, the Berlin Philharmonic has faced several challenges. For instance, it has had to transform itself into a 21^st century orchestra that is not only reliant on its historical merits. A key challenge is to cherish the tradition, while renewing it both musically and organizationally to meet the requirements of the future.

These challenges, however, are faced not only by the Berlin Philharmonic but also by the majority of symphony orchestras internationally. According to research on organizational change, this type of renewal requires a great deal of leadership (Kotter, 1990).

It is the interplay between maintaining culture, but at the same time renewing and transforming the orchestra to fit the future that poses the greatest challenge. This is

1 Patrick Furu (patrick.furu@uniarts.fi) & Marta Medico Piqué University of the Arts Helsinki, Department of Arts Management, PL 30, 00097 Taideyliopisto, Finland. Jörg Reckhenrich, Lorange Institute of Business

true for almost any organization, but perhaps it is most challenging for organizations with as deeply held values and traditions as those of the Berlin Philharmonic. In most organizational settings, one would assign the responsibility for solving this challenge to its leaders². In most orchestras “the leader’s role is fulfilled by a sole conductor” (Carnicer et al., 2015: 86). Following this line of reasoning, several studies have found that a transformational leadership style of conductors leads to a better quality of performance (e.g. Atik, 1994; Boerner & Gebert, 2012; Boerner

& von Streit, 2005; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009). In other words, conductors who are able to apply the three dimensions of transformational leadership – charisma, inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation (Avolio, 1999) – are the ones who reach a higher artistic quality (Boerner & von Streit, 2005).

However, in the Berlin Philharmonic with its democratic governance, the chief conductor’s role is not like that of the traditional conductor. As the first violinist Aline Champion says:

We are the Berlin Philharmonic. Conductors come and go, but the Berlin Philharmonic remains. And it’s the task of every musician in this orchestra to carry on this tradition.

(Dierks et al., 2008)

Therefore, in the Berlin Philharmonic, leadership is not only associated with the orchestra’s chief conductor Sir Simon Rattle. Instead, leadership is spread across the organization. This splitting of leadership responsibility requires a new conceptualization of the conductor-musician relationship. Attempts at such conceptualizations include relational leadership (e.g. Cunliffe & Eriksen, 2011;

Dachler, 1992; Fairhurst & Uhl-Bien, 2012; Koivunen, 2003), aesthetic leadership (e.g. Hansen et al., 2007; Ladkin, 2008), shared leadership (e.g. Pearce et al., 2008; Ropo & Sauer, 2003), rotating leadership (e.g. Davis & Eisenhardt, 2011), collaborative leadership (e.g. Furu, 2012; Kramer & Crespy, 2011) and leadership as co-creation (Birkinshaw, 2013) to denote the interaction between the leader and those who are led, i.e. in this case the conductor and the ensemble. These new conceptualizations appear to be more meaningful in explaining the leadership that is practiced in the Berlin Philharmonic.

In a world of increasing competition, declining recording industry and plunging public funding (Lehman, 1999; Lee, 2012), there is a strong need for novel, creative, and even daring choices in interpretation, programming, and venues. How this change and renewal can be accomplished in an orchestra with a strong culture and tradition is the focus of this study. According to the new conceptualizations

2 In this study, the main focus is on the leadership of the artistic and creative work of the orchestra. There is a distinction between on the one hand the artistic leadership and on the other hand the administrative/

managerial and economic facets of an arts organization (e.g. Auvinen, 2000). While the focus is on the former, however, the present study does not exclude the possibility that the artistic personnel (i.e. the musicians) could be involved in the managerial and administrative functions of the orchestra.

of leadership, the responsibility for change and renewal must be shared within the organization. The research question is, consequently, how the act of leadership is shared between the members of the Berlin Philharmonic orchestra.

We believe the Berlin Philharmonic provides a very illustrative example of an orchestra that has developed a unique concept of co-created leadership. We will analyse leadership in the orchestra as an activity shared among the members of the organisation.

This analysis takes the perspective of organizational and leadership studies as its starting point. According to this perspective, the orchestra is seen as an organization and a way of organizing, and there are persons and groups that exert influence and portray different leadership behaviours. This paper analyses these behaviours and reflects how they relate to the theoretical concepts found in the literature.

leadership and organizational Culture

The relationship between an organization’s culture and the leadership behavior exhibited therein is intrinsically reciprocal (Gil et al., 2005; Waldman et al., 2001).

In other words, leadership behavior influences and is influenced by the organization’s culture. There are studies on the mechanism of both national and organizational culture affecting leadership (e.g. Kyoungsu et al., 2004; Russette et al., 2008), as well as studies analyzing how leadership affects culture. For instance, Krapfl and Kruja (2015) claim that “cultures are more influenced by the leader than any other single factor” (p. 40). In this view, when leaders of an organization act, these actions represent certain values that shape the organization’s culture.

Schein (2010) describes organizational culture as the result of what the leaders have enacted upon the members of the organization. He argues that culture is

“ultimately created, embedded, evolved, and ultimately manipulated by leaders.”

(Schein, 2010: 3). Hence, culture is the result of leader behavior. However, at the same time as the organization evolves, culture will become a stabilizing process, a

“clan” that functions as a control mechanism (Ouchi, 1979, 1980). Thus, in the end, culture comes to the “point of ultimately specifying what kind of leadership will be acceptable in the future” (Schein, 2010, p. 3).

Brown (1992) argues that effective leaders have to develop skills that enable them to influence aspects of organizational culture in order to improve their organization’s performance. Although a fundamental characteristic of culture is that it is stable and thus does not change easily or quickly (Hofstede, 1981), there are things that leaders are able to do to influence culture. For instance, leaders can affect the organizational climate (Haakonson et al., 2008; James & Jones, 1974). Organizational climate is an aspect of culture, and it has been defined as “a set of attitudes and expectancies

The effects of organizational climate can be seen in employee motivation, employee development and retention, and employee performance (Holbeche, 2006).

Leaders play a crucial role in the organizational change process. Nevertheless, it is not enough to shape the climate of an organization, but it is fundamental to understand the deeper assumptions of a group of people. To change those is difficult, time-consuming and highly anxiety provoking (Schein, 2010).

In order to change the climate and culture of an organization, Chatman and Cha (2003) propose three levers that form, strengthen, and ultimately change culture. The first one relates to how organizations recruit and select people. Culture is either reinforced or changed with recruitment decisions. The second lever is how organizations socialize, orient, and train their members to perform work tasks. The third and the last lever refers to how people are rewarded and what the basis for rewards is. Chatman and Cha (2003) claim that “selection, socialization, and rewards should be used as opportunities to convey what’s important to organizational members” (p. 32).

leadership and symphony orchestras

Studies of leadership in symphony orchestras, and artistic leadership in particular, have predominantly assumed that the conductor is the leader. As Carnicer et al.

(2015) points out, orchestras are examples of groups and organizations in which

“the leader’s role is fulfilled by a sole conductor” (p. 86). In the past, symphony orchestras could be lead by a charismatic, even dictatorial, conductor. For example, the great conductor Arturo Toscanini was known for his autocratic leadership style (Mintzberg, 1998). Marotto et al. (2007) argues that traditionally the orchestral world has assumed that a “true maestro will create a shared aesthetic experience in an orchestra” (p. 398). Commenting on this type of conducting and leadership style, the former Finnish conducting professor Jorma Panula claimed that when conductors rely on “the dictator-kind of authority of, for example, Nikisch and Karajan, the musicians get scared and can’t give their best. Being a conductor is about making music together with the orchestra, with a chamber music-like orientation.”

(Konttinen, 2008: 180)

The world has changed from the times of autocratic leadership, including conducting. According to the British conductor Charles Hazlewood (2011):

we now have a more democratic view and way of making music – a two-way street. I as the conductor have to come to the rehearsal with a cast iron sense of the outer architecture of that music within which there is then immense personal freedom for the members of the orchestra to shine.

There are a number of studies on symphony orchestra conductors applying

transformational and charismatic leadership (Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1993).

Transformational leadership posits that there are four types of leadership behavior:

(1) “idealized influence”, i.e. raising followers to a higher level of achievement;

(2) “inspirational motivation”, i.e. motivating followers to surpass their individual interests for collective benefit; (3) “individualized consideration“, i.e. developing followers’ abilities to facilitate their own personal growth; and (4) “intellectual stimulation”, i.e. developing followers’ intellectual ability to approach problems in new ways. (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1985)

For instance, Atik’s (1994) work builds on that of Pollack (1991) who argues that communication skills and personality are crucial components of effective conductors.

Atik (1994) found that in the empirical study of conductors and orchestras, the emergence of the transformational style was “unexpected” (p. 76). Boerner and her colleagues have studied orchestral conducting in several studies, incorporating transformational and charismatic leadership as concepts, and they have found these styles to have significant effects. Boerner et al. (2004) found a positive impact of directive-charismatic orchestral leadership on the quality of ensemble playing effectiveness. Boerner and von Streit (2005) found the conductor’s transformational leadership style and the orchestra’s cooperative climate to have positive effects on the orchestra’s artistic quality. Furthermore, Boerner and Gebert (2012) found that a transformational leadership style by the conductor enhances organizational creativity and innovation. In addition, Rowold and Rohmann (2009) found positive performance effects of transformational leadership in orchestras.

Another stream of studies on leadership in symphony orchestras emphasizes leadership as a process of interaction between the administration, the conductor, and the orchestra members (Faulkner, 1974). For instance, Allmendinger and Hackman (1996) studied East-German orchestras that were under pressure to transform themselves based on changes in their external environment. They found that the orchestras’ successful change was a combination of on the one hand being a strong organization in terms of culture, and on the other hand having leadership initiatives taken by both orchestra leaders and players, and not only by the administration and artistic directors.

Koivunen (2003) and Koivunen and Wennes (2011) took the notion of interaction between leaders and members of the orchestra further. They applied a relational perspective (Dachler, 1992; Hosking, 1988) to the study of leadership in symphony orchestras, with a focus on aesthetics and a relational constructionist perspective. They concluded that leadership in symphony orchestras is a relational process between the leader and the followers, and that power and control is more distributed. Another study by Hunt et al. (2004) emphasizing the relationship between the conductor and the musicians posits that the longer period of time the relationship between the conductor and the orchestra has developed, the richer the

(2014) analysis of guest conductors and orchestras, where the power of the orchestra musicians over guest conductors is partly based on their history of playing together and thereby knowledge of one another.

In their review of leadership of creative people, Mumford et al. (2002) established three important characteristics of leaders of creative work. First, the characteristics of leaders that make it possible for them to be accepted as leaders of creative people. Expertise and knowledge are two critical features in this domain. Second, the repertoire of influence tactics used by leaders for effective direction of creative people in both individual and group contexts. Finally, the context within which the leader and creative people operate: how formal the structuration of work is and how the climate that the leader creates is. In order to motivate highly competent artists a significant degree of sophistication and expertise is required, but Hunt et al. (2004, p. 158) argue that inspiration is probably much more necessary than knowledge and intellectual stimulation. Their findings suggest that successful conductors do not only provide intellectual stimulation, but also inspiration through their passion for a piece of music and emotional stimulation of the musicians.

As stated above, research on leadership in symphony orchestras has to a large extent equated conductorship with leadership. However, some of the recent literature has drawn a more varied picture of leadership in orchestras, where many, if not all, members of the organization carry responsibility for leadership. This is related to some of the new emerging conceptualizations of leadership as a co- created activity between the leader and those being led (e.g. Birkinshaw, 2013). In this view, leadership is a process (Koivunen, 2003) and a set of activities, instead of a hierarchical position or even a structured role. What this means is that any member of the organization not only has the right to initiate leadership actions, but it is the responsibility of all members of the organization to do so. In this paper, we will explore this type of leadership concept in the context of the Berlin Philharmonic.

the Berlin Philharmonic

The Berlin Philharmonic orchestra is distinct from most other symphony orchestras in terms of its organization. The musicians of the Berlin Philharmonic decide everything that concerns the orchestra: repertoire, musical director, general manager, soloists, guest conductors, brand image, new business directions, such as the Digital Concert Hall³, etc. In the following, we will present some facts about the orchestra.

3 The Digital Concert Hall is an on-demand web-based archive containing concerts by the Berlin Philhar- monic, as well as interviews, documents and other material related to the orchestra. Viewers are able to access these materials for a fee. The Digital Concert Hall was founded in 2008 in collaboration with, among others, Deutsche Bank, Deutsche Grammophon and Sony.

organization and governance

The governance form of the Berlin Philharmonic is a public foundation. The democratic principle that guided the creation of the orchestra is followed in the orchestra’s organization. The musicians form different committees and these committees are responsible for different areas of the functioning of the orchestra.

The orchestra has selected two chairmen and two media chairmen to represent them on the Foundation Board (executive committee). This board comprises, besides the chairmen mentioned above, the artistic director (i.e. the chief conductor) and the general manager. It is worth noting that the general manager is the only non- musician on this board. The role of the general manager is to focus on the business development and marketing of the orchestra, while leaving all the artistic issues to the members of the orchestra.

The Foundation Board is responsible for the artistic direction and the strategic plans of the orchestra. They report to the orchestra membership full session meetings and to the Board of Trustees.

The Board of Trustees of the Berlin Philharmonic Foundation has nine members and includes the deputy chairman of the Orchestra Academy, the chairman of the Friends of the Berlin Philharmoniker e.V., a member of the Personnel Council, an elected member from the Berlin Philharmonic and four politicians: the Mayor of Berlin, the Minister of Culture and Media and two members of the House of Representatives.

The Orchestra Committee is a sounding board for the two chairmen of the orchestra. It is formed by five musicians. The Personnel Council is formed by seven people and it has no artistic role. It oversees personnel and working-conditions issues, including non-musician staff members. The chief conductor is also the artistic director of the orchestra. He is responsible for his own programs, and whereas he has some influence in the programs of guest conductors, these are always agreed with the Foundation Board.

The members of the orchestra make the decisions concerning recruitment and retention, including the artistic director and general manager. The audition process is made without a curtain and is totally inclusive, each member and the artistic director having one vote apiece. There must be a majority vote of at least two thirds of the members for the acceptance of a new member. The chosen member has to pass a two-year trial period. The election of the artistic director only needs a majority of votes.

The orchestra has a self-rostering system employed by each section. Players decide where they wish to sit in the section for a given program freely and often quite spontaneously. However, they do organize themselves, and independently determine their free time, without the need to ask for permission from the artistic director or

system reinforces creativity among the musicians, enabling them to learn from each other and to get new ideas. Every member is considered to be of equal quality and therefore, equally capable and interchangeable. (Lehman, 1999)

Decisions in the orchestra are made democratically. All main decisions are taken to the main orchestral meeting. In those meetings, every member of the orchestra has one vote, including the artistic director and the chairmen. Before voting, everyone has a chance to be heard. Then the decision is taken up for a vote. In most decisions, a majority vote is required for a decision. A particular case is permanent membership in the orchestra, normally after a probation period of a maximum of two years, where a two-thirds majority vote is required.

key figures

The orchestra runs on a yearly budget of approximately €41.4 million. The City of Berlin provides an annual grant to the Foundation of €14 million.

The Berlin Philharmonic is comprised of 128 musicians, of which 19 are women, and approximately 85 non-artistic staff members. There are 26 nationalities in the orchestra and Germans are still in the majority. Employee retention rate is extremely high; musicians may stay in the orchestra for-life. There is a forced retirement at 65.

The Berlin Philharmonic gives approximately 130 performances per year in Berlin and elsewhere.

Methodology

The data used for this study is document data. The Berlin Philharmonic is an orchestra that due to its position as a world-class orchestra and its control of its brand has a strong presence in the media. Moreover, several books and documentaries about the orchestra have been published. Hence, we determined that it was adequate to use publicly available information to study organizational culture and leadership in the orchestra. Therefore, the material collected comprises printed, audio-visual, and online material.

The main criterion for choosing relevant data from the diverse documents was to select only directly identifiable quotations from musicians of the orchestra during the period of Simon Rattle’s tenure as chief conductor (2002-present), the general manager of the Berlin Philharmonic, Simon Rattle himself, and regular guest conductors. The criterion for including a specific quote in our data was that it had to refer explicitly or implicitly to the following concepts emerging from the literature:

culture/identity of the orchestra, tradition, leadership, change, innovation, and/or interpersonal relations.

The final data is composed of 146 quotes coming from 3 documentaries, 3 published books, 8 newspaper and magazine articles dealing with the Berlin Philharmonic, as well as the interview section of the Berlin Philharmonic Digital Concert Hall (see appendix for detailed list). Examples of the quotes are seen in the results and analysis section.

The quotes were compiled in a database with each line representing one quote.

Along with the quote there was an identification of the source (see appendix) and the person from whom the quote came, if identifiable. The quotes were analysed by the researchers and coded according to the concepts identified in the literature. In this sense, the data analysis method was iterative as it was based both on theoretically driven concepts and categories found in the literature, and on data driven insights (Miles et al., 2014).

Considering the quality of the empirical material, we need to be aware of its potential shortcomings. On the one hand, the data come from the members of the orchestra organization, including guest conductors. They have themselves expressed these opinions and sentiments. On the other hand, however, one needs to be critical about the authenticity of their comments. While it is plausible that the subjects have actually meant what they have stated, there is no way of knowing what has been left out of the public documents. For instance, there may be important issues that have not surfaced. Furthermore, it is conceivable that the orchestra’s marketing and branding department may have influenced the messages that are allowed to go out to the media. Consequently, it is fair to treat the data as subjective and potentially distorted when it comes to providing the full picture of the phenomenon studied.

Analysis and results

According to Schein (2010), high performance of organizations is often related to strong organisational cultures. This section starts with analysing the principal characteristics of the Berlin Philharmonic’s organizational culture and identity, whereas the next subsection analyses the leadership within the orchestra.

History, tradition and culture

As mentioned previously, leadership can be seen as an activity that both draws from and feeds into culture. In fact, the data indicate that culture is a product of co- creation between its musicians, conductors and the surrounding environment. In the words of Simon Rattle, an orchestra

takes on its own life. And of course, it’s a matter of a lot of individuals. But there is a type of spirit within that which is not to do only with those individuals. It’s to do with their history, and the past. It’s to do with their history and the future. Time bends in those situations.

For the orchestra, tradition has always been a defining characteristic. The 2nd violinist Stanley Dodds refers to the intricacies of understanding the tradition and the culture of the orchestra:

I guess it’s like with every other society, the orchestra has a culture, as a culture of playing.

And when you come into it from the outside and there is somebody like myself who was inexperienced, you maybe don’t quite pick up the subtleties of it at the beginning.

Tradition is clearly an inherent part of the orchestra’s identity and culture.

Musicians are aware of it and pass it on to the others. It seems to function as an embodied socialization mechanism in which musicians act as reinforcers of the culture, in the way that Chatman and Cha (2003) describe it. In line with Schein (2010), tradition as a basis for identity and culture can form the basis for organizational strength. However, at the same time it can become a constraint for development, if not handled carefully. According to concert master Daniel Stabrawa,

“Tradition, that is myself. I have played with Karajan. The sound is still in my ear and I’m still searching for that”.

Integrating new members into the orchestra is more a matter of offering such personal experience, rather than speaking too much about it.

You can talk a lot about tradition, so much and complicated, that you do not know what it is at the end. I try to keep it simple and listen to the colleagues. Gabor they say, we play that broader, we always played it broader. Then I know it has to do with tradition. That makes it tangible for me. (Gabor Tarkövi, trumpet)

This comment reveals how tradition is passed on by the members of the orchestra, and based on the material the musicians seem to feel personal responsibility in sharing and maintaining those traditions.

Understanding the culture of any organization takes a long time (Schein, 2010).

This is why the trial period for new musicians in this orchestra is longer than in many others, lasting up to two years. As Chatman and Cha (2003) pointed out, selection and recruitment is fundamental in managing organizational culture. Accordingly, the orchestra probes each applicant to her limits to see whether she can really fit in with the orchestra both in terms of technique and musicality, and in terms of personality and accommodation to the culture. While established musicians in the orchestra describe the members of the orchestra as being kind and supportive, musicians who arrive at the orchestra find understanding the subtleties of the culture to be complicated and one of them expressed discomfort with the seriousness with which the orchestra takes its objective of making music at a top level. One musician describes his trial period in the following way:

For the first two years they really needled me, to see how much I could take, to see if I would make it or not. I simply wanted to only be one of them, but I had to quickly learn that it wasn’t possible then. (Albrecht Mayer, oboe)

Musicians express their difficulties during the trial period to feel part of the group, and how much time it takes to really integrate into the group. One of the reasons for that is the high level of peer pressure. This finding supports the conclusion that the orchestra members utilize peer pressure as an influence tactic, thus showing that they exhibit leadership (Mumford et al., 2002).

The pressure from the orchestra musicians might be an uncomfortable element for newcomers. Musicians appear to be highly self-motivated, as their comments reveal that the pursuit of musical quality is crucial in their everyday life. A musician describes the working atmosphere of the orchestra in the following way:

You can feel that they really enjoy their work, that every day they come to rehearsal with pride, but also with this touch of enthusiasm that you do not find in other orchestras around the world. So it’s a great working atmosphere. (Daishio Kashimoto, violin)

Change and culture

The critical question for an organization such as the Berlin Philharmonic is how an orchestra that has such strong traditions is capable of change and development.

What enables the orchestra to renew itself and free itself from those elements of tradition that keep it from moving to the future?

The musicians of the Berlin Philharmonic talk about tradition mainly in reference to two different aspects. Firstly, the way things are musically done, i.e. the playing culture. Secondly, the way things are done organizationally, i.e. the democratic self- governance structure. Interestingly, the musicians use tradition to explain who they are at the moment and, at the same time, to reason and justify a course of action for the future, even when it involves change. In other words, tradition appears to be both the reason to keep doing things in a certain way and the reason to change. One musician illustrated it as follows:

Without tradition, without those who have gone before, without the generations that belong to the past and their legacy there’s no such thing as art, no music, no development whatsoever. (Daniel Stabrawa, concertmaster)

This musician links development and tradition in a particular way by believing that development needs to be grounded in a set of traditions and beliefs, i.e. culture.

It is an elaborate interplay between tradition and change. According to the chief conductor:

The point of a real tradition is to take what is the strongest and vital part and carry it into a new world where all are searching for what that is. (Simon Rattle, chief conductor)

On the eve of the 21^st century it was clear for some musicians that the most conservative aspects of their tradition, although good and characteristic of the orchestra, could also be a competitive burden. One of the reasons the musicians said they chose Rattle as artistic director is because they believed that with him they could become a 21^st century orchestra. Both Simon Rattle and the musicians claim that at that time, nobody really knew what a 21^st century orchestra meant or what it involved, but they believed that together they could advance in that direction.

The Berlin Philharmonic is an organism, a sonic entity. And like all living organisms deserving of the name, it is geared to change, to development. We have to explore new avenues, work on new programs; we really have to look to the future. Competition is growing, and we have to do something if we want to withstand that competition. (Daniel Stabrawa, concertmaster)

After the election of Simon Rattle as the orchestra’s new artistic director, some of the musicians believed that Rattle embodied their vision of what they wanted the orchestra to be. It is worth noting that the appointment of Rattle was not self- evident, but that there was controversy as not all members were in support of Rattle (Gibbons and Conolly, 1999). Concerning the election of Rattle, Pamela Rosenberg, former general manager of the Berlin Philharmonic, expressed:

I think it was a signal that the orchestra wanted to embrace innovation. Rattle’s broad- minded approach to music, and the huge scope of his interests, from early music to the 21^st century – this was of great interest to the musicians. Now, there’s a synergy – artistic exploration is fed by tradition, and that exploration refreshes tradition. (Pamela Rosenberg, former General Manager)

Rattle’s scope of interests is not limited to the selection of repertoire. Before he accepted the position, the orchestra had to accept some of his conditions. Those ranged from the change of the formal organization – converting it into a foundation – to setting up an education program and rejuvenating the orchestra, among others.

Rattle manifested that he thought he was going to a much more traditional orchestra than what he found. Despite the musicians’ pride in their tradition and their belief that they are keeping it and passing it on to new generations, he found that it was his job to really cultivate those traditions and build something upon them. The following statement illustrates this line of thought:

I have found that part of my job is to remind them, also, of the Furtwängler-Karajan legacy – what is very important is to integrate this extraordinary tradition, particular ideas of sound, and special way of turning a phrase with all these brilliant, young, flexible, curious musicians. (Simon Rattle, chief conductor)

The relationship between Rattle and the musicians has not been always harmonious, as is evidenced in several occasions in the empirical material. Examples of this can be playing pieces that were off-limits, such as Baroque music with historical performance, the Sibelius cycles or Peter Sellars’ staging of Bach’s “St. Matthew Passion”. This latter project encountered a lot of resistance from the musicians.

However, many musicians agreed that the few months leading up to the concerts of St. Matthew Passion and the concerts themselves created an unprecedented sense of development in the orchestra. Some of the thoughts of the musicians on the project include:

This was one of the most important musical experiences of our lives, everyone in the orchestra is saying. (Fergus McWilliams, horn)

Everything we have done seems almost secondary after that. (Emmanuel Pahud, flutist) The renewal of the orchestra has been a collaborative effort. Initiatives have originated from all parts of the organization. For example, the Digital Concert Hall has helped transport the orchestra into the digital era. The idea for it came from the musicians themselves. The Digital Concert Hall and the creation of their own recording label is for them a logical step towards becoming independent from the uncertainty and demands of major music records. Musicians consider the creation of the Digital Concert Hall as a way to reach new audiences, not only in the sense of reaching people that are not physically present where they play, but also new generations that are used to digital media. Moreover, musicians put themselves online in chat rooms periodically to keep in touch and engage their audience. These are not all the new initiatives brought about by musicians in the Rattle era, but they do reflect the musicians’ interests in engaging new audiences, new formats and in embracing technology. (Müser, 2015)

leadership

In terms of leadership, there is evidence of a co-created leadership function. On the one hand, the orchestra follows a 150-year tradition of democratic self-governance.

On the other hand, the artistic director/chief conductor leads the orchestra not only from the podium but also strategically in the artistic direction that the orchestra takes.

In the governance sense, the Berlin Philharmonic employs the Foundation Board to make artistic and strategic decisions. In addition, there is the day-to-day relationship with the conductor and the musicians in the rehearsals to deal with, where creative negotiations also take place. This setup shows how leadership is a

With this self-governance structure the orchestra can also alleviate the tensions between artistic leadership and the administrative management that has been found in many orchestras (Castañer, 1997; Glynn, 2000).

Albeit recognizing the influence of their chief conductor in some matters, the Berlin musicians hold the belief that they are the main decision-making authority (i.e. “We are the Berlin Philharmonic”). However, the orchestra has delegated power to its chief conductor in certain issues, such as building the vision and program to take the orchestra into the 21^st century. Thus, this produces a form of co-creation of leadership between the musicians and the conductor where they influence each other, thus supporting Mumford et al’s (2002) claim.

It appears as though the orchestra’s self-government embodies the symbiotic relationship between organizational culture and leadership. The empirical data show the fundamental belief that the self-government is both a legacy that must be preserved, being the ideological core of the orchestra: we do things ourselves, we decide our future, and at the same time it is the musicians’ means of exercising leadership.

The idea of doing things ourselves, taking control, remains to this day. And whoever tries to interfere should beware! You would have to witness one of our assemblies to see how 100 orchestra members react if there is something… if there is an attempt made by someone to restrict their rights. That’s out of question. (Götz Teusch, cellist)

The democratic process of electing their artistic director is nowadays not entirely unique to this orchestra, but it is nevertheless a distinctive feature of the orchestra.

Another conductor commented on this process:

It’s a democracy, of course. They choose their own director and take it very seriously. It’s not just a question of likes and dislikes. No, they think very hard about what the future will bring or could bring. That’s very important. (Roger Norrington, guest conductor)

The self-governing system is an ideological system and is an artifact of identity as much as is it a governance system (Schein, 2010). It embodies a number of values and beliefs. Being able to make their own decisions and choosing their artistic director and new musicians is the core of the identity:

The collective identity is the most important thing. The player’s first responsibility is to maintain the institution, hence the importance of continuing to find the best players, and to care for the institution in the way that we manage it. (Fergus McWilliam, horn)

In this case, we can see the responsibility felt by the musicians as being a feature of collective identity (Schein, 2010). Another feature is to feel entitled to decide on both musical and managerial matters. This responsibility has been shown to be a feature of collaborative leadership (Furu, 2012). It seems to lead to a feeling of contributing to a common goal and direction, as one musician reflects:

For me, the main reason why the orchestra sounds the way it does, the underlying basis, is that every musician knows that he can contribute to determining the direction the ship takes. (Fredi Müller, percussionist)

The orchestra’s operating model appears to be one of a chamber music ensemble.

In that model, every person can take the musical initiative to lead the music one way or an other. The self-governing structure seems to empower the musicians to behave musically as a chamber music ensemble.

The musicians value their self-governing structure and they see it as a protective tool against powerful individuals, yet they recognize the need for a formal leader. As one musician expressed:

The larger a crowd is, the more unpredictable and childish it becomes. An orchestra can be childish, even when its members are Nobel Prize winners. A crowd always needs leadership.

(Albrecht Mayer, oboe)

However, it would be an overly simplified view to suggest that the chief conductor can take a paternal role in controlling the Berlin Philharmonic:

Controlling them? No. In the very best sense of the word, they are not controllable. It’s not about foisting something upon them, but rather guiding, encouraging, shaping what they do. What you have to do is find a way in which everybody has their input in a shared vision.

(Simon Rattle, chief conductor)

Rattle’s comment supports the new type of leadership, which no longer embraces the idea of the conductor being an individual heroic leader who inspires the followers to pursue his vision. Rather, Rattle is talking about a shared vision and not his own vision from the conductor’s pedestal. The shared vision comes from taking musicians’

insights and building something together with them, not upon them.

You have to set up a situation where somehow it can fly, if you do not set this situation, you are lost. If you do not decide enough things it is a free fall. If you decide too many things you can weight its wings so much that it can’t, it can’t get aloft. So you are always balancing and it is an endless process. (Simon Rattle, chief conductor)

Whereas a traditional leadership approach treats the orchestra musicians as passive subordinates who follow the lead of an heroic conductor, some scholars (e.g.

Khodyakov, 2014; Koivunen, 2003; Koivunen & Wennes, 2011) are proposing a more collective leadership approach, making the musicians part of the leadership process. Even though the Berlin Philharmonic has a celebrated, renowned conductor, the orchestra carries the responsibility for leadership:

It sounds a wee bit arrogant, but it has to be true that the orchestra is bigger than any of its maestros. We as players have to accept that responsibility, and every conductor has to accept that reality. (Fergus McWilliam, horn)

Simon Rattle sees the sense of responsibility and leadership taken by the musicians as a positive phenomenon, as he says:

They have a big personality, of course they’re stroppy. But the flip side is that they give so much. They discuss and argue back because they want it to be better. And it’s not just in terms of playing that they’re creative. (Simon Rattle, chief conductor)

Rattle’s comment reveals that the process of co-created leadership involves actual dialogue. There is an attempt to solve any disagreements in order to reach the common vision. The discussions and arguments are there to achieve a higher collective goal, which is musical perfection or, at least, striving for that perfection. It seems as if a traditional conductor approach would not last:

There have been conductors who wanted to show they’re right, to show that they know exactly how things should be done. They wouldn’t last a minute. (Götz Teusch, cellist) The musicians are very articulate, they are very open, they are very curious. They always want to know why we are doing something. They don’t just do it – they are not an obedient orchestra in that way, but they are a very creative orchestra. (Simon Rattle, chief conductor) It is quite obvious that Berlin Philharmonic musicians feel entitled to take an active part in the interpretative and creative process. However, this behaviour also manifests that the musicians are confident that the orchestra is a powerful entity with an opinion of its own regardless of the conductor it holds.

Conclusions

This study set out to analyze the organizational culture and leadership process in the Berlin Philharmonic. In this orchestra, leadership can be described as a process of shared action and responsibility taken by each member of the organization, regardless of their formal position. This conceptualization eliminates the classical hierarchical view of the conductor as a heroic maestro and the orchestra as merely following and executing the conductor’s vision. Furthermore, it even goes beyond the notion of transformational leadership within orchestras. As a matter of fact, leadership becomes an active negotiation in all dimensions of the artistic performance, organizational structure and culture.

The culture, the values and beliefs of the Berlin Philharmonic are their strong heritage and foundation, to keep their identity and to adapt towards new directions.

The unique culture of playing in the orchestra, described as playing as if they were a chamber ensemble instead of a symphony orchestra, stems from the same principle of self-governance: everyone can advocate for a musical idea and the others can pick up on that and interpret it. The self-governance principle is also why musicians

discuss and argue with their conductors about the musical interpretations, rather than being submissive to them. Musicians take an active role in the construction of the final performance. This dynamic is less a matter of organization or structure, but more a core ability of all members to handle a group dialogue, built on long-term experience.

Tradition is vital for the orchestra in the sense that it exists in everything it does.

The musicians acknowledge that tradition is their culture of playing, their sound and their democratic system. The musicians use tradition to explain who they are at the moment and, at the same time, to reason and justify the course of action of the future, which of course involves change.

The Berlin Philharmonic holds a shared leadership system. It is a system where musicians and the artistic director make decisions together. The whole orchestra understands the true essence of teamwork, which is an act of co-creation. Co- creation is an ongoing act to balance the relationship and all issues of the orchestra as a whole.

There are three essential dimensions to successfully lead creative settings: expertise and knowledge, influence tactics and the climate that is created (Mumford et al.

2002). In the case of the Berlin Philharmonic these dimensions are shared by both the conductor Simon Rattle and the members of the orchestra. The relationship between the musicians and the conductor is based on respecting each other’s viewpoints, as well as on equality, which is one of the core values of the orchestra.

Hence, we could speak of leadership as a process of co-creation at play in the Berlin Philharmonic.

Appendix: Data sources 1. Documentaries:

a.  Trip to Asia: The Quest for Harmony, 2008 b.  The Berlin Philharmonic Story, 2005 c.  Rhythm is it! 2004

2. Books:

a.  Music as Alchemy: Journeys with Great Conductors and their orchestras by Tom Service, 2012 b.  Rattle at the door: Sir Simon Rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic 2002 to 2008 by Angela Hart- wig, 2009

c.  Music at its best: The Berlin Philharmonic by Annemarie Kleinert, 2009 3. Newspaper / Magazine Articles:

a.  Boutsko, A. (2015, May 10). Egorkin: “The Berlin Philharmonic is like a giant ensemble”.

DW

b.  Smith, S. (2002, October 21). Rattle Makes Smooth Transition to Berlin Philharmonic.

Billboard.

c.  Imperato, A. (2011, April 4). What a Berlin Philharmonic Horn Player Learned From the YouTube Symphony Orchestra. The Huffington Post.

d.  Hewett, I. (2012, August 23). Of course the Orchestra is Stroppy. The Telegraph.

e.  Higgins, A. (2005, January 7). Karaoke, wild tigers, hysteria. Rattle on his turbulent affair with the Berlin philharmonic. The Guardian.

f.  Service, T. (2011, February 15). Baton charge. The Guardian.

g.  Woolfe, Z. (2014, September 26). The Berlin Philharmonic Comes to New York. The New York Times.

4. Digital Concert Hall: Interviews section.

REFERENCES

Allmendinger, J. & Hackman, R. J. (1996). Organizations in changing environments: The case of East German symphony orchestras. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 337–369.

Atik, Y. (1994). The conductor and the orchestra: Interactive aspects of the leadership process.

Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 15(1): 22–28.

Auvinen, T. (2000). Unmanageable opera? The artistic-economic dichotomy and its manifestations in the organisational structures of five opera organisations. Doctoral thesis. City University of London, Department of Arts Policy and Management.

Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1): 112–17.

Birkinshaw, J. (2013). Becoming a better boss: Why good management is so difficult. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Boerner, S. & von Streit, C. (2005). Transformational Leadership and Group Climate: Empiri- cal Results from German Symphony Orchestras. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12(3), 31–41.

Boerner, S. & Gebert, D. (2012). Fostering artistic ensemble performance: Exploring the role of transformational leadership. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 22(3): 347–365.

Boerner, S., Krause, D. E. and Gebert, D. (2004). Leadership and co-operation in orchestras. Hu- man Resource Development International, 7(4): 465–479.

Boutsko, A. (2015). Egorkin: “The Berlin Philharmonic is like a giant ensemble”. DW. Retrie- ved from: http://www.dw.com/en/egorkin-the-berlin-philharmonic-is-like-a-giant-chamber-en- semble/a-18439197

Brown, A. (1992). Organizational Culture: The Key to Effective Leadership and Organizational Development. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 13(2): 3–6.

Carnicer, J. G., Garrido, D. C., & Requena, S. O. (2015). Music and leadership: the role of the conductor. International Journal of Music and Performing Arts. 3(1): 84–88.

Castañer, X. (1997). The tension between artistic leaders and management in arts organizations:

The case of the Barcelona Symphony Orchestra. In Fitzgibbon, M. & Kelly, A. (Ed.), From Maestro to Manager. Critical Issues in Arts and Culture Management (pp. 379–416). Dublin: Oak Tree Press.

Chatman, J. A. & Cha, S. E. (2003). Leading by leveraging culture. California Management Review, 45(4): 20–34.

Cunliffe, A. L. & Eriksen, M. (2011). Relational leadership. Human Relations, 64(11): 1425–1449.

Dachler, H. P. (1992). Management and leadership as relational phenomena. In M. v. Cranach, W. Doise, & G. Mugny (Eds.), Social representations and social bases of knowledge (pp. 169−178).

Lewiston, NY: Hogrefe and Huber.

Davis, J. P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rotating Leadership and Collaborative Innovation: Re- combination Processes in Symbiotic Relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(2), 159–

201.

Dierks, U., Grube, T. and Thilo, A. (Producers) & Sánchez Lansch, E. and Grube, T. (Directors).

(2004). Rhythm is it! [Documentary-DVD]. Germany: BoomtownMedia.

Dierks, U., Grube, T. and Thilo, A. (Producers) & Grube, T. (Directors). (2008). Trip to Asia: The Quest for Harmony [Documentary-DVD]. Germany: BoomtownMedia.

Fairhust, G. T. & Uhl-Bien, M. (2012). Organizational Discourse Analysis (ODA): Examining leadership as a relational process. The Leadership Quarterly, 23: 1043–1062.

Faulkner, R. (1973). Orchestra interaction. Some features of communication and authority in an artistic organization. The Sociological Quarterly, 14: 147–157.

Furu, P. (2012). The art of collaborative leadership in jazz bands, in: Caust, J. (ed.), Arts Leadership:

International Case Studies, Tilde University Press. 2012.

Gapper, J. (2015). The Berlin Philharmonic orchestra finds harmony in democracy. Financial Times, July 1, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/25307942-1fd4-11e5-ab0f- 6bb9974f25d0.html#axzz3ldGj83hB.

Gibbons, F. & Connolly, K. (1999). Rattle set for classic music’s top job. The Guardian, June 12, 1999.

Gil, F., Rico, R., Alcover, M. C. & Barrasa, A. (2005). Change-oriented leadership, satisfaction and performance in work groups: effects of team climate and group potency. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(3/4): 312–28.

Glynn, M. A. (2000). When cymbals become symbols: Conflict over organizational identity within a symphony orchestra. Organization Science, 11(3): 285–298.

Hansen, H., Ropo, A., & Sauer, E. (2007). Aesthetic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6):

544–560.

Hartwig, A. (2014). Rattle at the door: Sir Simon Rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic 2002 to 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.amazon.es/Rattle-door-Berlin-Philharmonic-English-ebook/

dp/B00K001W6G.

Hazlewood, C. (2011). Trusting the ensemble. TEDGlobal 2011. Retrieved from: https://www.

ted.com/talks/charles_hazlewood.

Hewett, I. (2012). Of course the Orchestra is Stroppy. The Telegraph, August 23, 2012. Retrieved from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/proms/9492893/Simon-Rattle-interview-of- course-the-orchestra-is-stroppy.html

Higgins, A. (2005). Karaoke, wild tigers, hysteria. Rattle on his turbulent affair with the Ber- lin philharmonic. The Guardian, January 7, 2005. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/

world/2005/jan/07/germany.arts.

Hofstede, G. (1981). Culture and organization. International Studies of Management & Organiza- tion, 10(4): 15–41.

Holbeche, L. (2006). Understanding Change: Theory, Implementation and Success. Burlington, MA:

Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hosking, D. M. (1988). Organizing, leadership, and skillful process. Journal of Management Studies, 25(2), 147−166.

Hunt J. G., Stelluto, G. E. & Hooijberg, R. (2004). Toward new-wave organization creativity:

Beyond romance and analogy in the relationship between orchestra-conductor leadership and mu- sician creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15: 145–162.

Imperato, A. (2011). What a Berlin Philharmonic Horn Player Learned From the YouTube Symphony Orchestra. The Huffington Post, April 4, 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.huffington- post.com/albert-imperato/youtube-symphony-orchestra_b_847859.html

James, L. R. & Jones, A. P. (1974). Organizational climate: a review of theory and research. Psycho- logical Bulletin, 81(12): 1096–112.

Khodyakov, D. (2014). Getting in tune: A qualitative analysis of guest conductor-musicians rela- tionships in symphony orchestras. Poetics: Journal of Empirical Research on Culture, the Media and the Arts, 44: 64-83.

Kleinert, A. (2009). Music at its best: The Berlin Philharmonic. Norderstedt, Germany: Books on Demand.